Dueling ordinances were read at Thursday’s Pope County Quorum Court meeting as justices work toward a vote on how they expect county employees to record their time.

An ordinance was read that would require county employees to clock in and out using a biometric fingerprint clock. The ordinance, presented by Justice Gordon Thornsberry, failed to garner a second at last month’s meeting where Thornsberry presented the ordinance and said “I look forward to those who vote against it, because you’ll probably have an opponent next time when you get ready to run for re-election.”

This month, the ordinance garnered a second and was read once. It must be read twice more before justices can vote on it.

Thornsberry’s biometric time clock proposal isn’t the only ordinance on the table, however. Justice Dusty Hampton introduced an alternate amendment to the county’s personnel policy, which states its purpose is “to require Pope County employees to use a time-recording system that is approved by the Arkansas Department of Labor.”

“Basically what this ordinance does, it simply removes the requirement of having a biometric time clock,” Hampton said. “We have a number of department — probably over half the county’s already using time clocks — and I think the main purpose here in doing this is just to ensure we’re keeping proper records, keeping the employment records and the time records, and that’s what this ordinance will do.”

Although department heads and elected officials currently keep up with their employees’ time, Hampton said there was no official county policy requiring compliance with state time-keeping standards.

“All I’m asking for is let’s get 100 percent transparency on the thing,” Thornsberry said. “You use the biometric time clocks, nobody can clock in for you.”

The discussion regarding biometric time clocks stretches back several months, and earlier this year Judge Jim Ed Gibson appointed a Time Clock Committee, which discussed the matter at length before declining to recommend requiring the systems countywide. JP Tom McMillen said the committee determined any department heads or elected officials wishing to implement such systems within their department could submit a request, but none had done so.

Throughout the discussion of a single county-wide system, one of the concerns justices have had relates to employees who do not work out of a traditional office or work traditional 8-hour workdays. This include sheriff’s deputies, emergency personnel and even road workers.

“I’ve got a crew out there at the road department — I’ve got several guys that do not come in in the morning and do not come in in the afternoon,” Gibson said. “There’s operators that are scattered out through the county.”

Hampton’s ordinance was also read once Thursday. Both ordinances will appear on next month’s agenda.

One audience member, who identified himself as a longtime Pope County resident but not a county employee, spoke in favor of Hampton’s proposed ordinance.

“Just from a citizen’s point of view, let me just give you my point of view — and it may not be everyone’s point of view — but, with all due respect Mr. Thornsberry, there is no possible way that the voting members, the taxpayers of Pope County are going to agree with this biometric system,” he said. “As tight as money is nowadays, that’s just absolutely out of the question. We do elect these officials. We elect the judge, and if he doesn’t take care of his employees and treat them right and make sure that they work right, we’ll vote somebody else in.”

County commits to 26 pay periods

At what was supposed to be the third and final reading of an ordinance changing the county’s pay schedule to 24 pay periods per year, Justice Don Daily — who introduced the original ordinance — presented a new ordinance that would allow the county to maintain its current bi-weekly 26-pay period schedule.

The court originally considered the 24-pay schedule, acknowledged by justices as generally unpopular with county employees, to avoid struggles faced every 11 years when the bi-weekly payroll system ends up with 27 pay periods instead of 26.

Daily’s solution proposed setting back an extra 8-16 hours worth of salary for each position every year, building up so that by the time the 11th year comes around, the county has an extra 14-day pay period in reserve to fund the 27th pay period.

McMillen, who told the court last month he had a petition signed by 80 county employees who did not want to go to a 24-pay period system, spoke in favor of maintaining the bi-weekly system.

“I want to think Justice Daily for working on this,” he said. “This is dear to the hearts of county employees, and I think this is a good solution, and I appreciate it immensely.”

The court voted to suspend the rules and read the new ordinance three times, then voted to pass it. All present justices voted in favor of the amendment with the exception of Thornsberry, who voted against it.

Justices David Rollans and Shirley Chisum were not in attendance Thursday.

Wonder why nothing was said in the newspaper about the man who addressed the court with the issue about a policeman receiving 100 percent medical disability and working full time as a police officer in another jurisdiction?

An error this quorum court makes time and again is its assumption that they are hearing from a representative sample of taxpayers whenever the county employees kick up their usual fuss at the suggestion of any change. The employees are looking to keep their bread buttered uniformly, not to act as watchdogs of taxpayer dollars.

Of course they don't want a standardized time clock system. That would make it harder to fudge a 40-hour work week — something even good employees will do if offered the chance. Too bad Pope County seems determined to hand it up on a silver platter.